The Violation of Human Rights and Norms of Humanitarian Law in the Course
of the Armed Conflict in the Chechen Republic:

A Report of the Human Rights Center Memorial

Authors: O. P. Orlov, A. V. Cherkasov, and A. V. Sokolov

1. From the Authors

The war in the Northern Caucasus raged bloodily and cruelly for twenty-one
months. In terms of the amount of violations of human rights, of the number
of victims, and of the unusual brutality of the conflict in Chechnya, the
war exceeded anything seen in Russia since the end of the mass repression
in the 1950s. Indeed, in terms of the military implications, one must return
to the Russian Civil War in the 1920s to find an internal conflict of similar
intensity.

The authors believe that that the armed conflict in Chechnya commenced
on 11 December 1994, with the entry of federal forces onto the territory
of Chechnya, and ended on 30 August 1996 with the signing in Khasviurt
of the declarations and principles of the definitions of the basis of interrelationship
between the Russian Federation and the Chechen Republic.

This report represents a general attempt by the Human Rights Center Memorial
to document the violations of human rights and norms of humanitarian law
in the course of the conflict. This report does not pretend to be complete.

In the following sections, facts and events will be presented through the
use of examples. These are best seen as a series of facts collected from
a variety of human rights organizations. In this document, events are described
which, in toto, make up a systematic and massive violation of human rights.

The materials presented in this document were given to the Commission on
Human Rights of the Presidency of the Russian Federation. They were used
by the coordinating division in the preparation of the Document Commission
“On the Observance of Human Rights and Citizens’ Rights in the Russian
Federation in 1994-1995,” published on 5 February 1996.

The first draft of this document was prepared for the Parliamentary Assembly
of the Council of Europe on human rights in Chechnya, held on 23-24 September
1996, and was given to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe’s
Commission on Judicial Questions and Human Rights.

In 1996, Memorial prepared six books:

1. The Legal Aspects of the Chechen Crisis: Seminar Materials

2. The Conditions of the Maintenance of Detainees in the Zone of Armed Conflict
in the Chechen Republic: The Handling of the Detainees

3. By All Available Means…: The Russian Federation Ministry of Internal
Affairs Operation in the Village of Samashki, 7-8 April 1995 (available
in English)

4. No Submarines Were Found with Us…: Chronology of the Laying of a Smoke-Screen:
Kizliar-Pervomaiskoe, 9-26 January 1996.

5. Behind Their Backs…: Russian Forces’ Use of Civilians as Hostages and
Human Shields during the Chechnya War (available in English)

In addition, Memorial prepared Information of the Human Rights Center Memorial
on the Conflict in the City of Gudermes in December 1995 and Information
of the Observation Mission of Human Rights Organizations on the Violation
of Human Rights and Humanitarian Laws in the Course of the Armed Conflict
in the Chechen Republic. End of February-March 1996.

All of these materials were widely disseminated to the federal organs of
the government of Russia, the United Nations, the Council of Europe, and
to international human rights organizations.

2. Introduction

In evaluating the violation of human rights during the course of the armed
conflict in the Chechen Republic the authors refer to the norms guaranteed
in international treaties on human rights, and above all, in the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in the Convention against Torture
and Other Cruel, Inhumane, or Degrading Forms of Detention or Punishment.
The authors also make reference to the rights embodied in the International
Military Tribunal at Nuremberg in 1946, and to the regulations embodied
in the four Geneva Conventions.

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) as well as the Organization
for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the United Nations (UN),
and the Council of Europe (CoE) were all involved to some extent in monitoring
the armed conflict in Chechnya. The engagement of the OSCE and the ICRC
in Chechnya were particularly laudable. Where the UN is specifically concerned,
the reaction may be characterized as “too little, too late.”

3. The Violation of Human Rights and Norms of Humanitarian Law on the Part
of the Government of the Russian Federation

In accordance with Part Four of Article 15 of the Constitution of the Russian
Federation, “Universally recognized principles and norms of international
rights and international agreements to which the Russian Federation is
a party constitute an integral part of its legal system.”

The Soviet Union was a party to the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane,
or Degrading Forms of Detention or Punishment, the Geneva Conventions,
and also to the First and Second Supplementary Protocols to the latter.
The Russian Federation, as the legal successor to the Soviet Union, also
became a party to these international agreements.

In spite of this, the Russian government, from the outset of the armed
conflict treated it as a giant police operation to mop up “bandit formations.”
This was done with the use of heavy military weapons, including artillery
and tanks. Furthermore, this continued despite the recognition by the Russian
Constitutional Court in July 1995 that the conflict in Chechnya was an
internal armed conflict and was therefore subject to the Second Supplementary
Protocol to the Geneva Conventions.

The legal nihilism proclaimed by the government of Russia led to difficult
consequences. The war was conducted without law, which could be seen both
in the military actions as well as in the deployment of federal forces
onto the territory of Chechnya.

3.1. Factors Which Negatively Affected the Ability of the Federal Forces
to Observe Human Rights and Humanitarian Law

The military forces which the Russian Federation deployed in Chechnya in
December 1994 were neither morally nor materially prepared to uphold the
norms of international humanitarian law. This applies both to the conduct
of the forces under the supervision of the Defense Ministry and to those
under the supervision of the Interior Ministry.

3.2. Indiscriminate Attacks and Inordinate Use of Force

From the very outset, and throughout the course of the armed conflict in
Chechnya, the largest number of victims among the civilian population and
the greatest destruction were the result of attacks of an indiscriminate
nature and of the inordinate use of force. It is necessary to note that
this is a violation of the First and Second Supplementary Protocols to
the Geneva Conventions.

Although the campaign to “restore constitutional order” in Chechnya was
supposed to be completed within a week, the military forces of the Russian
Federation did not even succeed in exerting control over Grozny within
that time frame. The war in Grozny – entailing bombardments, shelling,
rapid assaults, and “cleansings” of populated areas – continued for a year
and a half. The report examines some of the assaults in a detailed manner.
Owing to the nature of the conflict, the civilian population of Chechnya
was unable to withdraw to any safe points or corridors within Chechnya.

This section details in depth the bombardment of Grozny, Shali, and other
inhabited areas in Chechnya.

3.2.2. Artillery Shelling and the Bombardment of Roads

This section examines how the long-lasting and pervasive bombings of extensive
areas of Chechnya made the entire geographical area extremely dangerous
for noncombatants. The report looks at several specific incidents of bombardment.

3.2.3. Operations and Assaults on Inhabited Areas

Assaults on inhabited areas were widespread during the conflict in Chechnya.
These operations claimed the lives of a large number of noncombatants in
both urban and rural areas of Chechnya. Based on eyewitness reports and
journalistic reports, this section describes a number of these attacks.

3.2.4. Indiscriminate Attacks, Shelling, and Bombardment of Inhabited Settlements
in Areas Controlled by the Federal Forces, and in the Period of the Armistice

Neither the armistice, the signing by inhabited areas of the “protocol
on peace and agreement,” nor even the seizure of areas by the federal forces,
saved noncombatants from indiscriminate attacks from artillery and air
forces.

3.2.5. The Use of Weapons Systems for Indiscriminate Actions, Inevitably
Leading to More Victims among the Civilian Population

This portion of the report shows how the use of particular weapons by the
armed forces of the Russian Federation inevitably led to a dramatic increase
in the number of casualties among the civilian population of Chechnya.

3.3. Premeditated Attacks on the Civilian Population

The execution of premeditated attacks on the civilian population of Chechnya
violated Article 13(2) and 11(1) of the Second Supplementary Protocol to
the Geneva Conventions. In the course of the armed conflict in Chechnya,
such attacks were not isolated incidents, but rather constituted a consistent
feature of the conflict. The nature of these attacks lead to the conclusion
that such attacks were of a demonstrative character and were intended to
provoke fear among the inhabitants of those civilian settlements loyal
to Dudaev.

3.4. Application of Principles of Collective Responsibility and Collective
Punishment

Article 4(2) of the Second Supplementary Protocol to the Geneva Conventions
states that collective punishments are forbidden and will remain forbidden
at any time and at any place. This point was consistently violated by the
armed forces of the Russian Federation operating in Chechnya.

3.5. The Disappearance of Individuals, Extra-judicial Executions

The disappearance of individuals and the execution of individuals without
proper trials constitute violations of Article 3(1), common to all four
Geneva Conventions, the Second Supplementary Protocol to the Geneva Conventions,
and Article 6(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

3.6. Illegal Detention of Civilians, Cruel and Degrading Treatment of Detainees
and Arrested Individuals, Use of Torture

These acts are clear violations of the four Geneva Conventions, the Supplementary
Protocols to the Geneva Conventions, the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,
Inhumane, or Degrading Forms of Detention or Punishment. Detainees were
held in two types of locations: at filtration points and at unofficial
points of detention. It should be noted that the book includes excerpts
from interviews with eyewitnesses to human rights violations.

3.6.1. Filtration Points

The so-called temporary filtration points were established by the Interior
Ministry at the end of 1994 and the beginning of 1995 in Mozdok (in the
Republic of Northern Ossetia-Alaniia), Stavropol, and Piatigorsk (in Stavropol
district), and later in Grozny. Detentions were often made as the result
of “cleansing” sweeps by the Russian armed forces in Chechnya. Those detained
were suspected of committing crimes or attacks against the federal forces.
Such detentions and filtration points violated the extant legislation of
the Russian Federation.

3.6.2. Unofficial Points of Detention

Beginning in December 1994, detainees were often held for several days
at storage points located in places occupied by the armed forces. These
places of detention held no legal or official status whatsoever. Visits
to these unofficial points of detention by Russian and international human
rights organizations were, for all practical purposes, impossible. Therefore,
information about these points and the conditions prevailing there had
to be obtained from those who were themselves detained.

3.6.3. The Treatment of Detainees Who Participated in the Armed Formations
of the ChRI

Detained and arrested individuals, who were known to belong to the armed
formations of the ChRI, were usually not held at the filtration points.
Rather, they were held either at unofficial places of detention, at roadblocks,
or in isolation. Conditions in such places were poor, and the affected
individuals could only be visited rarely by the ICRC.

3.7. The Use of Hostages and “Living Shields”

The exploitation of hostages and the use of “living shields” occurred in
Chechnya in express violation of the Geneva Conventions and other international
humanitarian norms.

3.8. The Restriction of the Freedom of Movement. The Hindering of the Exit
of Inhabitants from Blockaded Points of Settlement and the Denial to Doctors
and Representatives of Humanitarian Organizations of Access to Blockaded
Settlements

The widespread imposition of restrictions of movement by the armed forces
of the Russian Federation in Chechnya violated Article 12(1) of the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

3.9. Robberies and the Destruction of the Property of Civilians

The destructive nature of the armed conflict in Chechnya resulted in the
destruction of civilian property on a large scale, in violation of Article
4(2) of the Second Supplementary Protocol to the Geneva Conventions. In
addition, a considerable number of civilians were the victims of robbery
during the conflict.

3.10. The Destruction of Cultural Objects

Article 16 of the Second Supplementary Protocol to the Geneva Conventions
forbids attacks on objects bearing cultural, historical, or religious importance.
However, as the report shows, the cultural objects of both the Chechen
and the Ingushetian nations suffered heavily because of the armed conflict
in Chechnya. The authors do not hold the federal armed forces responsible
for all of this destruction, and it is evident that some cultural institutions
and objects were destroyed inadvertently. Nonetheless, it is clear that
the Russian armed forces made little if any effort to avoid attacks on
cultural objects.

3.11. The Violation of Voting Rights of Civilians

In Chechnya during the period of the armed conflict, a mass violation of
the voting rights of civilians occurred. This transpired in the course
of the elections for the head of the Chechen Republic and for deputies
to the State Duma of the Russian Federation, which were held in November
and December 1995. Violations were also evident in the course of the elections
for the deputies to the National Assembly of the Chechen Republic and to
the presidency of the Russian Federation, which took place in May and June
of 1996. These elections were not legitimate, and they did not ensure the
free choice of the electorate. Boycotts occurred in several communities.
The elections were characterized by crude intervention on the part of the
federal forces, including the restriction of travel to and from voting
sites. The population was also not able to receive full and unimpeded information
about the elections. This clearly violated both the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights, as well as the laws of the Russian Federation.

3.12. The Violation of the Rights to Free Seeking,
Obtaining, and Dissemination
of Information

From the beginning of the armed conflict in Chechnya, the government of
the Russian Federation, the offices of the federal armed forces, and representatives
of the armed forces sought to prevent the free reception and dissemination
of information. Although some of these actions may, at first glance, appear
to be in harmony with Article 19(3) of the International Covenant on Civil
and Political Rights, they would only be so if they were in accordance
with the law. In reality, they actually contradicted existing Russian legislation
and thus consequently violated the aforementioned article.

3.13. The Actions of the Command of Federal Forces in Chechnya, Ordering
the Prevention of the Destruction of Peacefully Inhabited Areas and a Cessation
of the Attacks of the Federal Armed Forces on Peaceful Civilians

It would be unjust to assert that the commanders of the federal forces
did not undertake any steps to lessen the attacks of the war on the civilian
inhabitants of Chechnya. However, the authors assert that such steps and
moves were simply insignificant and often had only a purely formal character.
For example, occasional benevolent attempts by commanders to erect “safe
corridors” for the civilian inhabitants of Chechnya tended to fail because
of an inability to control the armed actions of specific units or, simply,
because little or no effort was made to publicize the existence of such
corridors. The commanders of the Russian armed forces in Chechnya also
made no systematic attempt to acquaint their troops with the norms of humanitarian
law.

3.14. The Investigation of the Legal Organs of the Russian Federation into
Crimes Committed in Chechnya by the Soldiers of the Armed Forces and the
Interior Ministry of the Russian Federation against Civilians

In 1995 and 1996, at the fifty-first and fifty-second sessions of the United
Nations Commission on Human Rights, the Russian Federation was asked to
hold accountable all those who had violated the rights of individuals in
connection with the armed conflict in Chechnya, and to bring those individuals
before a court of law. Likewise, the UN Commission on the Elimination of
Racial Discrimination asked that all those who had violated human rights
or humanitarian norms during the conflict in Chechnya, be held responsible.
Unfortunately, these demands were not backed by the Council of Europe,
which in January 1996 invited Russia to become a member of that organization.
In the opinion of the authors, the decision of the Council of Europe does
not bear relationship to the real situation prevailing in the Russian Federation.
In fact, despite the decisions of the Russian Constitutional Court to let
Russian citizens pursue their grievances with reference to actions of the
militia, this remains very difficult to do. This is even more true where
the actions of the armed forces are concerned. Very few members of the
armed units have, to date, been punished for criminal acts committed in
Chechnya. In the opinion of the authors, the inefficacy of the work of
the prosecutors and their investigations into crimes perpetrated by federal
armed forces in Chechnya, are indicative not only of bias but also of an
unwillingness to carry out carry out investigations as such.

4. Violations of Human Rights and Norms of Humanitarian Law by Armed Formations
and Government Offices of the Chechen Republic Ichkeriia

The international community regarded the armed conflict in the Chechen
Republic from 1994 to 1996 as a conflict of a municipal, or intrastate,
character. Not a single internationally recognized state recognized the
independence of the ChRI. Thus, the authors of this document, in evaluating
the situation, make reference above all to the norms of Article 3 of the
Geneva Conventions and the Second Supplementary Protocol to these Conventions.
These norms regulate the conduct of intrastate conflicts.

The self-proclaimed Chechen Republic of Ichkeriia was not formally one
of the parties which signed and ratified the Geneva Conventions and the
supplementary protocols to them. Nevertheless, the armed forces of the
ChRI were also bound to uphold the norms of human rights. In July 1995,
the Swiss Federal Council, which acts as the guardian of the Geneva Conventions
and the Supplementary Protocols, including the ratifying documents and
letters of the signatory states, received the declaration of the parliament
of the ChRI. This letter, dated 14 July 1995, stated that the ChRI willfully
submitted itself to compliance with the Geneva Conventions and the Supplementary
Protocols.

This section will only evaluate the compliance with humanitarian norms
and human rights of those units serving under the political leadership
of the ChRI. However, it is important to remember that areas of Chechnya
existed in which armed groups operated under the control of neither the
Russian Federation nor the self-proclaimed government of the ChRI.

4.1. Indiscriminate Use of Armed Force and the Deployment of Military Units
in the Vicinity of Civilian Settlements

The military formations of the ChRI utilized armed force indiscriminately
in the course of the conflict, although they did so to a significantly
lesser extent than the armed forces of the Russian Federation. However,
the ChRI formations provoked the federal forces into indiscriminate attacks
by themselves attacking from areas located within civilian settlements.
In such confrontations, it was often impossible for noncombatants to flee
or be evacuated safely. As a result, such confrontations led to a significant
number of civilian casualties from attacks by the federal forces. This
transpired in violation of the First Supplementary Protocol to the Geneva
Conventions.

4.2. The Hindrance of Movements of Noncombatants out of Grozny

By hindering the exit of noncombatants from Grozny beginning on 25 December
1994, the political and military representatives of the ChRI violated humanitarian
law, specifically the Second Supplementary Protocol to the Geneva Conventions
and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It is important
to note that the affected noncombatants were of a variety of nationalities
– Chechen, Ingush, and Russian.

4.3. Terrorist Acts outside the Borders of Chechnya: The Taking of Hostages,
Premeditated Attacks on Civilian Settlements and Medical Institutions,
Extra-Judicial Killings, and the Use of “Living Shields”

Violations of human rights on the part of the organs of the ChRI were not
restricted to the territory of Chechnya. They also extended to Dagestan
and to the Stavropol district. The taking of hostages is an absolute violation
of international humanitarian law. The other actions described in this
section are violations of the Supplementary Protocols to the Geneva Conventions,
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention
against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane, or Degrading Forms of Detention
or Punishment. Furthermore, these actions contradict the Declaration on
the Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism. Due to the nature of
the incidents in question, the authors have been unable to confirm the
extent of the responsibility of the government and military organs of the
ChRI.

4.4. The Taking of Civilians as Hostages on the Territory of Chechnya

Commencing in the autumn of 1995, the armed structures of the ChRI began
detaining and kidnapping civilians. In this respect, it is difficult to
discern purely criminal acts from the detention of “collaborators” and
“assistants of the occupying administration.” In December 1995, after the
beginning of the armed conflict, the abduction of civilians assumed a massive
character. This was to a large degree the result of decisions taken by
Dudaev and his government. To be sure, among the abducted individuals there
were some agents of the Russian government. However, it goes without saying
that these agents constituted an obvious minority of the persons kidnapped.
Memorial therefore clearly sees this as an attempt to take hostages.

4.5. The Conditions in which Captives from the Russian Armed Forces Were
Held and the Forcible Seizure of Civilians

For the period of the war in Chechnya, the total number of Russian military
personnel who were captives or missing in action (and could be counted
as captives) is about 2,000. The use of torture and inhumane detention,
in the case of many of these individuals, took place in express violation
of the Geneva Conventions, the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane, or
Degrading Forms of Detention or Punishment.

The mutual release of forcibly seized individuals was stipulated in each
of the many agreements on peace. Yet each time the absence of agreement
on this specific point, amongst others, resulted in the collapse of talks.

4.6. Extra-Judicial Killings, Death Penalties, Carried out as a Result
of Overly Simplified Legal Proceedings. The Disappearance of Individuals

In violation of several key elements of international humanitarian law,
the military formations of the ChRI committed extra-judicial killings of
both civilians and members of the Russian federal armed forces. A particularly
large number of extra-judicial killings by the armed forces of the ChRI
occurred in the wake of the capture of Grozny in August 1996. The killing
of victims did not appear to be related to their ethnic identity. Although
Memorial has not been able to confirm it, it appears that the executions
in Grozny at that time were made on the basis of previously drawn-up lists
of victims, largely comprised of individuals who had worked for organs
representing the government of the Russian Federation. The authors of the
book do not have an exact figure of the number of extra-judicial killings
committed, but reliable sources have stated that the execution list for
one region of Grozny comprised more than 200 names. It remains to be investigated
how, and by whom, these lists were composed. It should be noted that the
armed forces of the ChRI also conducted extra-judicial killings of suspected
robbers and marauders. At the beginning of September 1996, the government
of ChRI proclaimed an amnesty for most detainees of the pro-Moscow government.

4.7. Corporal Punishment

Beginning in the spring of 1995, in the armed formations of the ChRI and
in many areas not controlled by the federal armed forces, Shar’ia courts
were established. This section treats the formation of these courts and
the legal principles on which they operated. The courts meted out corporal
punishment, in violation of Article 7 of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights.

4.8. The Investigation of the Legal Organs of the Chechen Republic Ichkeriia
into Crimes Committed by the Soldiers of the Armed Forces of the Chechen
Republic Ichkeriia against Civilian Settlements and Captured Soldiers of
the Russian Federal Army

The legal organs of the ChRI, in the majority of cases, do not regard the
violations of human rights and norms of humanitarian law committed by the
armed formations of the ChRI in the course of the armed conflict as crimes.
The individuals who have committed such violations have, in the absolute
majority of cases, not received any form of punishment. In this respect,
the legal organs of the ChRI do not differ significantly from the analogous
federal organs, which also have proved unwilling to prosecute the crimes
of “their own.”

The authorities of the ChRI have introduced their own criminal statutes
in place of the code of the Russian Federation. The new code came into
effect for all parts of the ChRI in September 1996. Although the exact
extent to which these new statutes carry weight in the ChRI is not completely
clear, the authors attempt to analyze the compatibility of the statutes
with internationally recognized humanitarian norms.

4.9.1. Basic Definitions

Already the first section of the criminal code of the ChRI violates fundamental
human rights and contradicts a series of basic principles of criminal law.
In particular, the authors cite violations of the Second Supplementary
Protocol to the Geneva Conventions and of the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights.

4.9.2. The System of Penalties

The criminal code of the ChRI stipulates the death penalty through stoning
as the highest penalty. This clearly constitutes cruel and unusual punishment
in violation of Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.

4.9.3. Disproportionality and Disproportional Penalties

Besides the aforementioned prescription of stoning, criminal code of the
ChRI is replete with disproportional penalties. These include punishments
which are tantamount to slavery.

4.9.4. Crude Violations of Several Fundamental Rights and Freedoms of Human
Beings

In addition to the above violations, the prescription in the ChRI criminal
code of the death penalty for apostasy from Islam must be mentioned. This
contradicts the right to freedom of religion embodied in Article 18 of
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Also of concern
are the potentials in the criminal code for legal discrimination against
non-Islamic individuals.

5. Conclusion

Gross and massive violations of human rights and humanitarian norms were
committed by both sides in the conflict, as is obvious from the above text.
Nevertheless, the number of victims among the civilian population, and
the amount of material destruction caused by the federal armed forces,
were incommensurably larger. Furthermore, the actions of the federal forces
were deeds undertaken by military and police forces subject to the command
of the internationally recognized government of Russia. That is, these
forces were serving a state which, having signed a series of international
legal documents, took it upon itself to observe unconditionally human rights.
This gives the violation of human rights by the federal Russian forces
an extraordinary gravity.

The Human Rights Center Memorial condemns the conduct of both sides in
the conflict in Chechnya.

On one hand, how is it possible to attempt to evaluate and compare the
actions of a legitimate government, fighting for the restoration of the
rule of law and order with the actions of a group of separatists, recognized
by no one, whose attempts to destroy the territorial integrity of the country
and to establish a sovereign government in and of themselves violate international
law?! On the other hand, how is it possible to attempt to evaluate the
actions of the conquerors, who continuously strove in the nineteenth and
twentieth centuries to destroy the Chechen nation, and the acts of the
victims of the aggression, who fought for the realization of the basic
human right of self-determination?!

Yet if we want to see the future not as an unending confrontation of opposing
states and nations:

If we want to preserve hope for their realization,

If we do not want the repetition of destructive wars aimed at the destruction
of civilian settlements,

If we are agreed that it is necessary to find the road to reconciliation
after any conflict,

If we conceive of ourselves not only as citizens of a particular state
or of a particular nation, but also as members of the human community,

Then we must find general criteria for the evaluation of the acts of the
government and of individuals acting in whatever capacity in the area of
humanity and in observation of human rights whether in conditions of intense
conflict or in war. Absolute prohibitions must exist – that some things
must remain forever forbidden under all circumstances. Violations of these
prohibitions must be condemned. Moreover, it is imperative that they are
condemned socially in accordance with legal order.

The legal nihilism evidenced by the acts of the Russian Federation in the
course of the armed conflict in Chechnya demonstrated contempt for international
norms in the area of human rights, violated Russian laws, and betrayed
an unwillingness to punish the shameful criminal acts against the civilian
population. There was no victory in the conflict. Moreover, these deeds
only increased the antagonism towards the federal forces and lessened the
little support that existed for the protégés of Moscow among the population
of Chechnya.

These same tendencies, evidenced by the organs of the Chechen Republic
Ichkeriia and several of its commanders, are today resulting in the difficulties
which Chechnya faces as it embarks towards a peaceful existence.